Henry: Pay your own way is not always best for Amarillo

Man, I have to admit, I love the spirit behind many of these digitally-expressed reasons as to why the Amarillo Recreation Complex — a multipurpose aquatics center — drowned at the ballot box.

Seriously, I get the sentiments, and can’t say I totally disagree.

Perhaps it is the strong conservative political makeup of Amarillo, if not the Texas Panhandle, that tore down the ARC.

In these parts, if you want something done (right or not), you do it yourself — don’t go looking to government (or your fellow taxpayers) to get it done.

Again, I get it — and I prefer this independent attitude to the attitude of wanting government to control more of our lives and do everything for us. However, if this independent attitude (you want it, you do it) always prevails — if there is no sense of community and future — Amarillo cannot grow.

This is not to say the ARC would have automatically made Amarillo an athletic mecca, but to oppose such a project simply because you think you or your family/friends will not use it so you don’t want to pay for it (which I think was more of a factor than many realize) is taking independence to an unnecessary level.

Take this attitude to the extreme, and we’re all home-schooling our kids because those without school-age children don’t want to pay for public education.

It is not that Amarillo voters do not want to pay for anything (almost every school bond in the past 20 years has survived the ballot box), but for whatever reason, projects like the ARC (focused on athletics/recreation) are a tough sell.

Amarillo voters have not supported a general obligation bond for capital improvements for parks/recreation since 1972, so it is not like the city is obsessed with providing facilities for our weekend warriors that want to play softball or flag football.

Those of us who have played softball on city fields know that some of these fields are ... well, let’s just say some fields are better than others.

There is no possible way for the city to get a project on the ballot that has something for everyone, that is unless voters want to foot the bill for a gun range/soccer/volleyball/baseball/softball/fast-pitch softball/flag football/swimming/golf/disc golf/running (you get the picture) facility. However, the ARC hit a lot of these sports/activities.

If Amarillo voters are so independent that they only want to pay for things that they use or benefit them exclusively, Amarillo will be out of the game.

A pat on the back

To Texas State Rep. Four Price, R-Amarillo: Price was recently named the 2013 Legislator of the Year by the Texas Civil Justice League “for his legislative efforts to increase fairness in the Texas civil justice system,” primarily authoring House Bill 1869, according to a news release. The bill “strikes a fair balance between allowing a severely injured person to recover damages caused by a negligent wrongdoer, and allowing the victim’s health insurer to recover a reasonable portion of medical expenses paid on the victim’s behalf.”

A kick in the pants

To opponents of Amarillo’s ban on handheld cellphone use while driving: This was mentioned in an editorial last week, but it is worth repeating. As of last week, the city issued only 91 citations for violations of the handheld cellphone that applies to motorists. The ordinance became official in February. That is an average of about 10 citations a month. This means the city is hardly using the ordinance as a means of extra revenue, as some opponents claimed. In a month, most motorists probably see a lot more than 10 of their fellow drivers yakking on their cellphones while driving.

ADVISORY: Users are solely responsible for opinions they post here and for
following agreed-upon rules of civility. Posts and
comments do not reflect the views of this site. Posts and comments are
automatically checked for inappropriate language, but readers might find some
comments offensive or inaccurate. If you believe a comment violates our rules,
click the "Flag as offensive" link below the comment.

Comment viewing options

Sort Comments

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Question with boldness even the existence of a god; because if there be one he must approve of the homage of reason more than that of blindfolded fear. Thomas Jefferson in a letter to Peter Carr, August 10, 1787

Dump all of the dumb downtown plans and divert the public funds earmarked for those boondoggles to the ARC. But only after the promised $6 million in private funds has actually been raised, audited for confirmation and deposited in Ware's ANB as planned. We citizens don't want to cover another shortfall in private monies like we did on the performing arts center.

I'm glad that the City runs the City like most people run their household. We pay as we go to keep from being bailed out by our children. This isn't the federal government who just print more money and could care less about future generations having to pay for it. The newspaper and other supporters are sore losers and need to get over it. Thank God we don't rubber stamp the paper's endorsements.

You said it yourself, this city cannot even maintain what they have now correctly. What would this $30m ARC look like in 10 years if they maintained it like they have done with the parks currently in place?

Let the city prove it actually has an interest in maintaining what they have before they get another toy to destroy through neglect. I can't wait to see how the field at the new ballpark downtown looks after 2 years.

Then you address the cellphone ban, and it's more of the same from the city. A lot of talk, no action on it's position.

At least they changed the amount of signatures needed to get something on the ballot now. I'm sure they wanted to stop people from being able to do things like get the red light cameras and cell phone ban overturned, but needing 5% of voters (around 4700) to sign the petition in 120 days to put the ARC back up will be just as difficult.

Most households are like all governments. They live so far in debt they just hope to make it to the next payday. Unlike the government the familys do not have a grantee of steady money. If they miss a payday they struggle to catch up. If they lose a payday( job) or have a major crisis they stand too lose everything they worked their life for.

In government there are necessities and there are amenities. Necessities such as public safety, infrastructure and maintenance should always come first and should always be paid for with taxes and fees. Amenities such as parks and baseball fields should alway come after every necessity has been covered. Amarillo had to pass bonds to pay for necessities such as fire stations while using tax and fee income for amenities and then claims, even after raising taxes this year, to be short on policemen. Obviously they do not have a sufficient grasp of their current finances and physical assets to manage them correctly. Why would we give them another $30 million dollar facility, along with the operation costs, to mismanage?

The supporters of ARC were asking every property owner to make an investment for the next 20 years. When anyone wants investors they put a business proposal together. What is the cost to build and operate. What are the potential sources of revenue and how much. If AISD will pay for use of the facility, have they committed to do so if it is built, how much each year and what amount of time each day or month. What hours of the day would the facility be open for public use and what is the projected fee for use by individuals. What is projected payroll cost for employees, how many and what level? You do not get investors to commit by just offering up the cost and blowing pink smoke about who, what, when and how much revenue will be generated.

How many tournaments each year do similar facilities host, how many participants, what is estimated cost and revenue from tournaments and swim meets?

In a public works project a break even is a success. If there is a projected shortfall, how is that shortfall to be covered?

It perhaps is not a matter of keep your hands out of my wallet. Perhaps it is a matter of if I am going to invest in your project, what assurance do I have that you can make it work and you won't be back with your hand out again and again telling me that now that we have the debt to service there is not enough revenue to operate so we need more money or we have to shut it down but the debt still has to be serviced.

Jumping up and down talking about how wonderful something will be for kids, make the city progressive blah, blah does not a workable project make. Our current leadership have lots of dreams of rainbow colored unicorns but they seem to fall short in cost justifying the cost and feeding of unicorns.

Dividend excellent points. Why should the tax payers financially support a poorly put together business proposal that more than likely wouldn't have passed the sniff test with a loan officer at the bank?

Ha ha Buck, love, now you know that I don't take anything personal on here. Plus I was only passing on some info...it's AISD that deserves the credit for a program that does what every community should by serving these students.

Houston voters turned down building a 70 million dollar stadium as well as a bond issue to save the astrodome. Colorado voted down an increase in state income tax and in a somewhat amusing move voted to raise the tax on marijuana as well as some interesting ordinances about people not being able to toke up in public or even in their front yard where kids might see them.

I am sure there were many other examples of taxpayers saying no to any sort of tax increase for anything but education or essential services. There also seemed to be a somewhat cavalier attitude about the objections that were expressed from our mayor and the group that wanted the ARC. They seemed to either dismiss or ignore objections. Ok, you think the objections were silly , fine, we will just go vote. And we did.

Maybe you should have listened instead of thinking it was a strategy to get it passed by slamming it on the ballot with a bunch of changes to the city charter because you thought people who wanted the ARC would flock to the polls and a bunch of people just would't care nough to vote. Strategy didn't work.

We all are painfully aware the AGN was pro-ARC, and it was fairly and squarely voted down by the very people that would have been saddled with paying for it. That is a fact.
The AGN should accept this fact, build a bridge and get over it. And build that bridge with private money, not mine. TMF